Hi, On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 03:26:13PM +0100, PUYDT Julien wrote:
> Le jeu 19/12/2002 à 15:18, Daniel Burrows a écrit : > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 09:17:23AM +0100, PUYDT Julien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > was heard to say: > > > Le mer 18/12/2002 à 18:45, Niels Möller a écrit : > > > > use some other construction that is secure even if the enemy has > > > > infinite > > > > computational power > > > > > > I'm pretty sure it isn't possible: > > > > One-time pads are definitely secure against any mathematical attack. > > (if you assume that the bits of the key are perfectly random) > > Basically, given an encrypted message, every key/plaintext combination > > is equally likely. > > Cool. How do you send your key (that is as long as your message, btw)? Well, it's definitely useful in scenarios where you want to give your message to two messengers, that are not allowed to know the contents when they're separate; only when they come together will the plaintext be available. Effectively you split the message in two parts, each of which is useless without the other. Cheers, Emile. -- E-Advies / Emile van Bergen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel. +31 (0)70 3906153 | http://www.e-advies.info
